Seven years ago, a mere a short phrase to electrify a Labour conference and to show the party was falling out of love with its then leader. While not precisely soaring oratory, the phrase were greeted with rapturous applause as delegates stood for an impromptu ovation.
When the noise subsided, Keir Starmer, stood at the podium, blinking in surprise. He wasn't really accustomed to his addresses producing such a reaction. All he had said was: "We are not excluding staying in the EU". But context is everything.
In that darkly divisive time of 2018, departing from the prepared script like this was always going to be seen as laying down the gauntlet to the party leader, who sought to prioritize Brexit voters in working-class seats over the Europhile sentiments of his party. In just one speech, this grey-suited opposition Brexit spokesman was transformed – albeit temporarily – into a political gambler who championed most Labour MPs, members and voters against the leadership he later succeeded.
The Evolution in Position & Settled Issues
Since then, the landscape has shifted, not least to Starmer himself. An early move after taking over in 2020 was to declare the Brexit issue had been settled by the 2019 national vote. And, at the last one, he repeatedly emphasised unbreakable pledge commitments that forbade re-entry into the EU, the single market or a customs union.
Like his predecessor, the PM's approach has focused on winning Brexit-y voters in target constituencies, despite polling evidence indicates many of them have passed away or shifted opinion.
Pressure Building on Europe
Yet, it’s now Starmer is now to be an embattled party leader. And, if Europe may not be the central crisis in UK politics, the cap which was tightly sealed for five years is starting to loosen again.
Both Starmer and Rachel Reeves have ramped up their language regarding the damage caused by Brexit has caused to the UK’s economy. It’s a useful stick with which to beat the Reform UK leader, who now rarely mentions how leaving the EU was his primary goal and remains his sole political accomplishment.
And yet, the extent of the economic harm, reportedly has left Britain with an economy that is significantly diminished than if it were still in the EU, towers over the minor adjustments thus far implemented by the government. Starmer’s so-called relationship reset negotiated with the EU last summer provides gains measured in fractions of a percent.
Internal Pressure and Ambitious Proposals
The chancellor is one of those trying to overcome long-standing interior ministry opposition to a broader scheme designed to boost growth youth mobility scheme allowing young people can travel between the UK and the EU for work or study.
The deputy prime minister has pondered publicly about the “self-evident” benefits of being in an EU customs pact, as several Labour backbenchers, including the chair of the powerful finance committee, recently supported an opposition proposal on customs union membership.
While Nick Thomas-Symonds, the minister in charge of EU policy, now present at all cabinet sessions, maintains the firm boundaries remain unchanged, there exist avenues to work around them. One idea would be to announce the start of negotiations now for a more ambitious agreement, for inclusion in the following election platform, to be enacted only after securing a new electoral mandate.
The Prime Minister's Deep-Seated Doubts
However, Starmer has most recently damping it all down again cautioning that a return to a European customs area would “unravel” the commercial agreements with the US, which he views as key accomplishments of his premiership.
Reportedly that the PM’s scepticism run even deeper, stemming from three further factors.
- Firstly, he thinks any customs union agreement is now significantly more difficult as ministers are busily de-aligning from European rules in numerous policy areas, like environmental standards.
- Secondly, the exorbitant price set for the UK to join the EU’s new defence fund and the ensuing failure in talks has led UK negotiators that former EU partners are less interested in cutting special deals to the UK and are more focused on demonstrating that leaving the EU was a mistake.
- Lastly, the new US national security strategy, which has been welcomed by the Kremlin, is viewed by key advisors in Downing Street as grounds for Britain to maintain distance from the EU.
A Bizarre Strategy and Strategic Considerations
This bizarre and terrifying document claims Europe is threatened by cultural extinction because of immigration. It contains only one reference of the UK, placed beside a proposal that the US government may interfere in our politics to encourage the growth of “patriotic” parties.
But, far from concluding that this renders the US an undependable ally, ministers is worried that deeper EU integration could upset the global balance by endangering precarious American backing for Kyiv, NATO, and other alliances.
Succession Chatter & The Ghost of 2018
This situation returns us to 2018. The PM has consistently stated his speech was not a pitch for the leadership but simply an attempt to keep open the possibility of staying in the EU in a future vote. In fact, in those days, he still supported a tailored trade agreement similar to the one he now appears to be opposing.
Observers within Downing Street note that the Health Secretary, widely considered would stand for the leadership, is among a group of cabinet ministers signaling they desire greater ambition on Europe.
Aides to the Deputy Prime Minister, another probable runner in a future race for the top job, maintain she refuses to comment on her stance on a customs union as it would merely “escalate unhelpful speculation”.
The Obvious Danger & A Prudent Reminder
The risk is clear. Should the PM reject more meaningful steps towards EU alignment, he cedes ground to claim the territory where the overwhelming majority of Labour MPs, members and voters reside.
It would be wise of him to remember the effect that a short phrase had for him seven years ago. Potential pathways for a major proposal on EU relations that the prime minister ought to consider; he should explore them personally, rather than letting rivals adopt them as their own.
